Just the same, if the global warming theory is correct, the problem is fossil fuels. Nuclear power plants produce next to no greenhouse gases.
I do have to agree with this, but there are just a few tiny, little details that are usually not mentioned by the nuclear lobby. For example the fact that for the mining and preparation and transport of the uranium, an amount of greenhouse gasses is produced, equal to what a cole-powered plant would have produced, producing the same amount of energy the nuke-plant does. And of course, more is produced when transporting the waste material and processing it.
Then there's the fact that of the 30 years of lifespan an average nuke-plant has, it's busy for 29 years to re-produce the energy used for building the plant and winning and processing the uranium before it can be used, so the actual effective duration of winning energy is only one year.
Of course this is totally unimportant to the nuke-lobby, since THEY make really huge profits in a short time and don't care if the next few hundred generations have to take care of their waste, so why mention this. Just tell people about the very short time the uranium is 'safe' in the reactor and never mind the huge amounts of toxic waste (uranium-ore contains just about 1% uranium, the rest is almost just as radio-active but useless and is just dumped) that is produced before, or the even more dangerous waste, that stays dangerous for thousands of years, what makes storage underground insecure because no-one knows how the earth will behave in that time, and above ground you do not know how long packings will last. (But at least you can do something if anything threatens to go wrong. That is if, say 1500 years in the future, the danger has not became some legend of the past in the eyes of the people living then.
And it contains plutonium, that is the most toxic material known, and of which only 1 atom in your body is good for a cancer.
But for the rest, nuclear energy is OK, apart from the chances it gives to terrorists to get their hands on some plutonium/uranium to make a nice nuclear bomb, or a plane-crash on a plant to poison vast areas, or....should i go on?
I like the text on a Greenpeace-shirt: "Pigs can fly, the earth is flat, and nuclear energy is safe"
You obviously never used doublespace, or QEMM, or DR-DOS. Oh yeah, what about them stacker folks?
Uhhh....Doublespace was MS, and indeed, it sucked. But QUEMM was a Quarterdeck product, DR-DOS was not M$ (forgot what DR stood for), and Stacker was not M$. So what are you trying to say here???
Personally I have had no trouble with MS-DOS 6.x, avoided Doublespace because i knew it sucked and (sort of) skipped W3.x for the same reason. (Now I'm using W95, didn't know in time it also sucks:-(. )
Mosaic programs, which are based on carefully worded questions about student behavior based on case histories of people who have turned violent......
Appearently they only ask questions based on already violent people. If they found out they all drank coffee, would drinking coffee be a sign of possible violence??
I'm left wondering how the mega-corporations would get away with this when wrongful death suits were filed. Seeing as how a jury of our peers would award a settlement, I'd think it would get rather expensive to continue to infringe on other peoples' rights this way. Wouldn't you? Not if they had (and they WOULD have) the (financial) power to change the laws the way they liked. And they WOULD!!!
You would 'kill to manipulate the government into leaving you alone'. If M$ gets it's way, soon you would kill to manipulate M$ to leave you alone! Do you really think a free market is possible with only one party in it?? Or 1.000001 party, as M$ might complain about competition from this 0.0000001 party? I think not! Or are you paid bij M$ too;-) ?
Slashdot Mirror
Just the same, if the global warming theory is correct, the problem is fossil fuels. Nuclear power plants produce next to no greenhouse gases.
I do have to agree with this, but there are just a few tiny, little details that are usually not mentioned by the nuclear lobby.
For example the fact that for the mining and preparation and transport of the uranium, an amount of greenhouse gasses is produced, equal to what a cole-powered plant would have produced, producing the same amount of energy the nuke-plant does. And of course, more is produced when transporting the waste material and processing it.
Then there's the fact that of the 30 years of lifespan an average nuke-plant has, it's busy for 29 years to re-produce the energy used for building the plant and winning and processing the uranium before it can be used, so the actual effective duration of winning energy is only one year.
Of course this is totally unimportant to the nuke-lobby, since THEY make really huge profits in a short time and don't care if the next few hundred generations have to take care of their waste, so why mention this. Just tell people about the very short time the uranium is 'safe' in the reactor and never mind the huge amounts of toxic waste (uranium-ore contains just about 1% uranium, the rest is almost just as radio-active but useless and is just dumped) that is produced before, or the even more dangerous waste, that stays dangerous for thousands of years, what makes storage underground insecure because no-one knows how the earth will behave in that time, and above ground you do not know how long packings will last. (But at least you can do something if anything threatens to go wrong. That is if, say 1500 years in the future, the danger has not became some legend of the past in the eyes of the people living then.
And it contains plutonium, that is the most toxic material known, and of which only 1 atom in your body is good for a cancer.
But for the rest, nuclear energy is OK, apart from the chances it gives to terrorists to get their hands on some plutonium/uranium to make a nice nuclear bomb, or a plane-crash on a plant to poison vast areas, or....should i go on?
I like the text on a Greenpeace-shirt: "Pigs can fly, the earth is flat, and nuclear energy is safe"
So far for my 0.02.
You obviously never used doublespace, or QEMM, or DR-DOS. Oh yeah, what about them stacker folks?
:-(. )
Uhhh....Doublespace was MS, and indeed, it sucked. But QUEMM was a Quarterdeck product, DR-DOS was not M$ (forgot what DR stood for), and Stacker was not M$. So what are you trying to say here???
Personally I have had no trouble with MS-DOS 6.x, avoided Doublespace because i knew it sucked and (sort of) skipped W3.x for the same reason. (Now I'm using W95, didn't know in time it also sucks
Mosaic programs, which are based on carefully worded questions about student behavior based on case histories of people who have turned violent......
Appearently they only ask questions based on already violent people. If they found out they all drank coffee, would drinking coffee be a sign of possible violence??
I'm left wondering how the mega-corporations would get away with this when wrongful death suits were filed. Seeing as how a jury of our peers would award a settlement, I'd think it would get rather expensive to continue to infringe on other peoples' rights this way. Wouldn't you? Not if they had (and they WOULD have) the (financial) power to change the laws the way they liked. And they WOULD!!!
You would 'kill to manipulate the government into leaving you alone'. If M$ gets it's way, soon you would kill to manipulate M$ to leave you alone! Do you really think a free market is possible with only one party in it?? Or 1.000001 party, as M$ might complain about competition from this 0.0000001 party? I think not! Or are you paid bij M$ too ;-) ?